From: sandmann AT clio DOT rice DOT edu (Charles Sandmann)
Message-Id: <10302071435.AA24969@clio.rice.edu>
Subject: Re: BNU 2.13.2.1 query
To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Date: Fri, 7 Feb 2003 08:35:14 -0600 (CST)
In-Reply-To: <3E438BB0.A80BD903@phekda.freeserve.co.uk> from "Richard Dawe" at Feb 07, 2003 10:34:24 AM
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.5 PL2]
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Reply-To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To: nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com
Precedence: bulk

> > On 1-Jan-2003 there was an incremental Bin Utils 2.13.2.1 release. I have
> > not seen any info on this version.
> > 
> > Does anyone know if any of the changes will affect us?
> 
> Currently if you try to build the sources with debugging on with gcc 3.2.1 and
> binutils 2.13, it will crash in the DXE build. It has been mentioned before on
> this list that the bug that causes this crash has been fixed in a later
> binutils release. I haven't checked this, though.
> 
> What would the package be called? We currently have bnu213b, etc. bn21321b?
> bu21321b?

Unless it fixes working with UPX, or someone understands why these changes
are happening - I think we should just say NO to newer binutils and stick
with something older that works.  But that's up to whoever is using it :-)

Downgrading to something newer, just because it's newer and buggier, isn't
always the right thing to do.